Councils in the driving seat: transport devolution explained

The government is devolving transport powers to English local authorities through the cities and local government devolution bill, which is working its way through parliament, and the forthcoming buses bill, which would give directly elected mayors the responsibility to run local buses.

What’s happening in Manchester?

The devolution agreement between central government and Greater Manchester outlines the powers to be transferred as the region moves towards having a directly elected mayor in 2017. New responsibilities include a devolved transport budget with a multi-year settlement, responsibility for franchised bus services, smart ticketing and potentially devolved rail stations across Greater Manchester.
This long-term commitment to funding is critical in the transport devolution debate, as it allows for more effective planning of projects like with those in London, says Greg Marsden, director of the Institute for Transport Studies at the University of Leeds. Transport for London (TfL) is able to increase its income through congestion charging and business rates supplements, allowing it to reinvest in projects such as Crossrail.

What about the rest of England?

Plans for Greater Manchester also form part of the northern powerhouse programme, which aims to close the north-south economic divide with investment in infrastructure, including major transport projects. The government asked councils to team up and put together bids for more power and it has received 38 proposals.
But David Cameron’s recent Yorkshire jibe may have been a fair summation of devolution squabbles. Although West Yorkshire has managed to reach an agreement, Leeds city region’s bid to take greater control of infrastructure has hit a wall as North Yorkshire refuses to transfer highway and transport powers for three of its districts.
Cornwall is so far the only county, and rural area, to be promised a devolution deal, with powers over franchising and improving local bus services.

Why devolve transport powers?

The government says the UK has a productivity problem – official figures place it at 17% below the average for G7 nations. Devolving transport powers is meant to address this: improved local transport should lead to a more mobile workforce, which should reduce the productivity gap between London and other regions.
“Making it easier for people – especially those on low incomes – to commute a further 20 minutes each way would put them within touch of two or more major employment sites, and potentially 10,000 more jobs,” says a recent report by the thinktank Policy Exchange.
Chancellor George Osborne hopes that by 2020 northern powerhouse projects will have generated 100,000 new jobs, raising the employment rate in the north-west to the UK average.

Could there be other motives?

Some critics argue that it’s just another method to deliver cuts without taking the flak. Others feel that it’s a route to more privatisation of services. Marsden considers devolution to be desirable, irrespective of potential cuts. “If the government is cutting resources in transport spending then they can do this with or without devolution, and local government would still suffer the impacts of that,” he says.

But James MacColl, head of campaigns at the Campaign for Better Transport, fears that much of the potential offered by devolution is being wasted. Despite two-thirds of public transport journeys being made by bus, funding for local buses has been slashed by 15% since 2010 and local authorities have been forced to cut 2,000 routes.
“It is no good ruining efforts to get local transport authorities together to produce a northern transport strategy by putting on hold billions of pounds of rail investment projects, failing to provide funds for local roads and buses, and wasting billions of pounds on damaging major road building schemes,” he says. “The government needs to get its act together to support local authorities, not mess with them.”

What do the unions say?

The Trades Union Congress is concerned that devolution may be used to cut national rail funding and break up Network Rail. It believes greater national and local accountability can best be achieved through a national integrated railway under public ownership, which is advocated by the new Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn.
The blueprint for the northern powerhouse claims that 40 major road schemes will create more than 2,000 jobs. But Mick Cash, president of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union, says that 1,000 train guards will be made redundant once Rail North assumes joint control, with the Department for Transport of new northern and Trans-Pennine express franchises. “These are skilled quality rail jobs and their loss is hardly the right track to better passenger services or a northern powerhouse,” he says.

Will it deliver everything that’s promised?

Significant questions remain as to how carbon reduction targets will fit in with devolved transport powers, particularly around the lack of clarity on bus subsidies.
There are fears, as outlined in a report by the Smith Institute, that the very people who would have most to gain from focused investment in local transport infrastructure, such as those in rural or deprived areas, may lose out – devolution has so far has focused on cities that the government trusts to take on new powers.
Marsden also fears that the Department for Transport has not considered what devolution means for its future role. “It’s not like you can just have devolution where power goes to the regions and that’s it,” he says. “They’ve got to reimagine what their supporting role is.”
MacColl believes those using the services will best judge the success of devolution. “Ultimately, people will judge plans to move powers from Whitehall to local authorities on whether they really get the better local transport services they deserve,” he says.
Article in Guardian news paper